Difference in 500mm zoom and a 500mm Telephoto Lens.
Feb 17, 2015 07:30:44 #
shagbat
Loc: London
annie blossum wrote:
BUNDLE NIKON D7100 br 18-140 VR DX LENS NIKON br 5... (show quote)
Sounds good to me Annie, you will need to take much care using the 500mm, even in ideal conditions. You may well find that enlargements from the 300mm are superior to it.
Best regards
Feb 17, 2015 07:34:23 #
Sdubois wrote:
Save your money. Buy a used Full Frame Camera like the D800 I just found one for 1000.00 next, buy. 70-200 f/8 I also found one on Craig's list for 1000.00. Want amazing shots? Start there. You can crop close enough to count the feathers with the D800 36mp sensor. If you need to get closer, use a multiplier. Else the Nikkon 80-400mm for about $800 used
Telephoto and zoom are the same thing.
Telephoto and zoom are the same thing.
The only D800 you'll find for $1000 must be broken. Worse yet, the D7100 has higher resolution than the D800!
A 70-200mm f/2.8 for under $1000 is the first version, not the current 70-200mm f/2.8 VRII. The first version is okay for an APS-C body like the D7100, but stick with the VRII version for a full frame body. Regardless, 200mm is not suitable for birds.
Same problem with an 80-400mm where the older AF-D version is available for under $800, but the newer AF-S version is significantly a better lens has a much higher cost too. The older version might well work though. It is not that sharp, and it is way too slow.
The best buy is still a refurbed D7100 and a Tamron 150-600mm (and absolutely not the older 150-500mm).
Feb 17, 2015 07:35:40 #
shagbat
Loc: London
annie blossum wrote:
So if I go with the 500mm telephoto it won't zoom in and out to get the correct focus like my 300mm AF did. How would or would AF work for this type lens.
You focus manually Annie, it is extremely difficult in anything but bright sunlight.
Feb 17, 2015 07:52:30 #
shagbat. no manual focus for me to shot birds. For other things it's OK.
I like the details in this male bluebirds wings. Shot with Nikon D80 with 300mm lens.
Feb 17, 2015 07:56:19 #
Ranjan
Loc: Currently Cyber-Nation!
Annie, a 500 mm on a sub-FX sensor size (7100...?) would be equivalent to ~800mm lens on a full-frame (35 mm) sensor and should suffice, unless the subject (eagle) is too too far away, in which case haze etc would interfere quite a bit, I suppose. With any lens!
Feb 17, 2015 08:01:06 #
shagbat
Loc: London
annie blossum wrote:
shagbat. no manual focus for me to shot birds. For other things it's OK.
It's good fun Annie, I have modified mine to focus closer, ie for stationary small birds etc, just be aware that it will never become your standard bird lens. It is extremely low contrast too, and you have to 'stop' it down, though you will rarely use it at anything other than F8.
Feb 17, 2015 08:12:30 #
Apaflo wrote:
Zooming and focus are two different things. br br... (show quote)
There is nothing wrong with a 50-500 as long as you understand how to best leverage its strengths. Is it as sharp as a 500 F4, no. But can it make really good images? Well, let the viewers judge for themselves.
Here are some samples.
small detail crop from a larger image
(Download)
(Download)
vertical crop from a landscape image
(Download)
Feb 17, 2015 08:33:01 #
Refurbished is the only way to go. All it means is that it has been out of the box. Only way I buy.
Feb 17, 2015 08:33:11 #
Refurbished is the only way to go. All it means is that it has been out of the box. Only way I buy.
Feb 17, 2015 08:34:28 #
2 Dog Don wrote:
Refurbished is the only way to go. All it means is that it has been out of the box. Only way I buy.
That's also my first choice, but you have to remember the limited warranty.
Feb 17, 2015 08:51:54 #
annie blossum wrote:
I'm looking at a D7100 Nikon sold at Walmart. It comes in a bundle deal with 3 lens and all of the accessories for $1,635. The 500mm lens is a telephoto. I'm taking pictures of eagles and need a more powerful lens than my 300mm. Can you tell me the difference in a 500mm zoom and 500 telephoto lens. As you can see this picture is highly cropped and I still can't get a sharp photo especially the eyes.
Shot with a 300mm sigma zoom lens at ISO 500 f6.7 direct sunlight.
Shot with a 300mm sigma zoom lens at ISO 500 f6.7 direct sunlight.
Skip the bundle....!!!!
I have a d7100 with a tamron 150-600. My wife has the sigma 150-500 on a d5200. Both lenses are a alot of bang for the buck. I also have the kit 55-300...ok lens, but not in the same league as the sig or tamron
Refurb D7100 is about $700. If you buy from Cameta they extend the Nikon refurb warranty to a full year
Tamron 150-600 about $1100
Sigma about $900
Both of these combos are in your price range...And you will not be disappointed.
Search tamron 150-600 here...you see what the lens is capable of.
Feb 17, 2015 09:03:37 #
Gene51 wrote:
There is nothing wrong with a 50-500 as long as you understand how to best leverage its strengths.
The best way to leverage its strengths is to buy a Tamron 150-600mm lens which is significantly sharper at 500mm than either the 50-500mm or the 150-500mm Sigma lenses, and of course goes to 600mm which they don't. Those lenses used are only slightly lower in cost than the Tamron.
The Tamron and Sigma 150-600mm lenses are a significantly better investment.
Your images of course are very nice, but like most images posted to prove a point they fail totally. Unless you post comparison shots from other lenses, or shoot test charts with the different lenses, all that posting an image claiming to prove something does is demonstrate a lack of rational argument replaced by wonderful emtions...
Here is a rational comparison of the 150-600mm with other similar lenses.
http://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2014/01/tamron-150-600-telezoom-shootout
Feb 17, 2015 09:27:48 #
Apaflo wrote:
The best way to leverage its strengths is to buy a... (show quote)
I am not impressed . . . Like I said, you really have to understand a lens's weak and strong points - Anyone who has ever used a 50-500 knows that it is least sharp at 500 and F6.3 - but it improves considerably at F8 - the samples I posted were at minimum focus distance, which is also a strong point of the lens. It does have a short MFD.
So in the end, what really matters is what images you can take and how they will be received by those who purchase them. Each of these were sold many times.
So why don't you post some of your images taken with a Tamron 150-600 and and the Nikon D7000 (or 7100). Put your money where your mouth is, but be sure to take your foot out first.
Floyd, you are one piece of work. And as true a dilettante as I have seen.
Feb 17, 2015 09:28:25 #
mikedent
Loc: Florida
SO how about comparisons between Tamron 150-600 and the new Sigma 150-600 offerings, I think Contemporary and Sport? I'm not sure if they even have been released yet to compare.
Feb 17, 2015 09:36:20 #
Gene51 wrote:
I am not impressed . . . Like I said, you really h... (show quote)
That would be just another appeal to emotions. Instead I have posted a very well done comparison of the Tamron 150-600mm to other similar lenses, including the Sigma 50-500mm. All done by someone with the facilities to make accurate comparisons too.
Gene51 wrote:
Floyd, you are one piece of work. And as true a dilettante as I have seen.
Ah yes, as soon as you realize you've made another mistake, out come the gratuitous personal insults you are famous for. This is just about the best indication there is that you know what you've said cannot be supported by any reasonable or logical discussion.
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.